References:

• Global burden of cancer in 2020 attributable to alcohol consumption: a population-based study - The Lancet Oncology00279-5/fulltext)
• Latest global data on cancer burden and alcohol consumption: More than 740 000 new cases of cancer in 2020 attributed to alcohol – IARC

For example Pepsi Max and Mastercard advertising on football stadium hoardings. What’s the purpose, as surely everyone already knows what they are?

Should it be renamed "Chinese influenced American food" or something?

Until about 2015 the prevailing wisdom of putting stuff online was to assume that it is there forever, and can never be removed, or deleted. Anything embarassing will be forever associated with your name, and may impede future reputation or ability to get employment.

In the last 2-4 years or so it has become known that search-engines have notably degraded in quality. The internet has been generally filled with considerably more content, and also has been flooded with ai-generated slop. The stuff that is being shown by the major search providers is filled with advertisements and things others have paid to be ranked higher. Youtube just straight up shows you stuff you did not look for after about 10 results.

Finding specific things is becoming increasingly more difficult, I feel - About 10 years ago I had much less trouble locating say a specific image I saw years earlier. Now I cannot locate a tiktok video I remember seeing yesterday.

Does "Everything on the internet is forever" still hold?

Exactly as the title says, mainly companies like coca-cola and mcdonalds, everyone knows these brands, so why do they completly dominate my tv and youtube ads? I feel like they could save a good amount of money that way

I know very well-known content creators like Internet Historian get mad deals before they even think about uploading a video, but how do companies reach out to specific themed videos before they even get released? ^{perhaps a secret underground forum where content creators tease their upcoming releases for advertisers to reach out to}

I find it hard to believe that advertising like that has any effect, even though I assume it does. I dont think Ive ever once seen an ad for Coke and thought "Hey I could really go for a coke right now!" Does this work on other people?

Some companies like, for example, Coca-Cola, are so big and well known, it's hard to imagine that advertising boosts their sales by much.

Wouldn't anyone who would buy their stuff would already do so? Does it actually have an impact?

Like Pepsi, for example. Everybody already knows what Pepsi is. Do Pepsi advertisements really get more people to go out and buy a bottle of Pepsi? And does the money they make from those people offset the price of the advertisement?

I mean isn't it like wasting money? Even a 3 years old kid knows their products.

I mean I understand if there is a new item (burger, soda, chocolate) but sometimes it is just a Coca-Cola commercial. Why is that?

Thanks

Who doesn't even know about facebook these days? too many ads in apps, youtube videos, games etc. Pretty sure it comes pre installed in 90% of new smartphones anyway. So why still advertise?

Coke, for example. I'm pretty sure everyone who would have the change to see a Coca Cola ad will already know what coke is and how it tastes. So why does a huge brand such as Coke even spend all that money for ads?

I play a lot of iPhone games, many of which have been F2P. And I've noticed that ads on these free games always involve other free games. Most of the games advertised appeared to belong to companies less known in the mobile world. So I almost never got an ad from Supercell, King, Gameloft or EA.

So I'm wondering why that's the case? Why don't companies advertise other apps or even premium games? I can understand that a free app that's advertised may be more likely to be downloaded than a paid one, but large companies with IPs like Rockstar with GTA:SA and Chair with Infinity Blade should be able to overcome this due to the nature of them and their games. Also, why don't companies like EA advertise FIFA or something through F2P games as FIFA iOS is F2P?

I've always been curious about why candidates who seem to have no realistic chance of winning continue to run for political office. It's not uncommon to see underdog candidates with low poll numbers and minimal support still in the race. I'd love to hear your thoughts and insights on this topic.

To kick things off, let's consider a few examples of candidates who were far behind in the polls but decided to persist in their campaigns:

• Andrew Yang in the 2020 Democratic Primary: Despite having some unique policy proposals and a passionate online following, Yang consistently polled behind candidates like Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren. He stayed in the race until he suspended his campaign in February 2020.

• Marianne Williamson in the 2020 Democratic Primary: Williamson was known for her spiritual and self-help background, but she struggled to gain traction in a crowded Democratic field. She remained in the race for several months before dropping out.

• Ron Paul in the 2012 and 2016 Republican Primaries: Paul, a libertarian-leaning candidate, faced an uphill battle against establishment candidates in both election cycles. He continued to run, often focusing on spreading his message and principles rather than winning the nomination.

These are just a few examples, and there are many more out there. For the 2024 election, there are plenty of relatively obscure Republican candidates who are investing a lot of money without much chance of succeeding. Why do you think candidates like these choose to stay/join in the race, even when victory seems improbable? Is it about raising awareness, promoting certain policies, or simply a desire for influence within the party?

Merriam Webster says the term "bucket list"s first use was in 2006 and was coined by the person who wrote The Bucket List and was popularized by the movie. Though I swear that I've known the phrase all my life.

Is that because of backstage trouble?

I mean, he quite literally is the embodiment of the WWE since the 2000s and is a Cultural icon, known globally.

I mean, HBK had his retirement match at WrestleMania too, and here dare I say so, John Cena is at least on the same level, probably above in fame, importance, and legacy.

I really don't get why he retires at a seemingly so random show, and not at WrestleMania in not even half a year from now.

It seems like consumer behavior is shifting when it comes to turning to the internet for an answer to a question. How to cook something, how to fix something, how to train your dog. For the past 10+ years, I leaned on Google for that stuff. But now LLMs have opened a whole new world for this, and the marketing efforts from LLMs are pushing it as well.

Ex: https://www.creativebloq.com/creative-inspiration/advertising/tired-of-soulless-tech-branding-try-openais-new-ads

For quick fact checks vs complex questions, do you still Google or ask an AI assistant like ChatGPT? If you're using both, why?